Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] GPL defense issues

[Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1530 bytes --]

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 09:44:40PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 30 August 2016, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 05:33:36PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Anyway, like I was saying, no one from Linaro ever contributed
> > > > something meaningful (except some cross-tree patches, and the usual
> > > > "maintainance" patches).
> > > 
> > > I'm not surprised at all. Most of the kernel work we do in
> > > Linaro is intentionally cross-platform (so it benefits all members
> > > equally), or it is done on those platforms that the members decide
> > > are important upstream.
> > > 
> > One may wonder how your Linux kernel patches and merges are classified
> > per the above.
> >
> > Thank you for all your work in the Linux kernel. It is anything but
> > meaningless, and it obviously goes far beyond "some cross-tree patches,
> > and the usual maintenance patches".
> 
> I'm sure Maxime was specifically referring to mach-sunxi specific code
> here, but it's clear how that could be interpreted differently, or
> taken out of context.

Yeah, sorry, I wasn't try to reduce or deny the huge amount of work
Linaro is doing on the whole kernel.

My point was just that, on the Allwinner specific code, all the work
done was on code that was already there, not on any new code.

Which doesn't prevent us from using a lot of Linaro code everywhere.

Maxime

-- 
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]